No – The US already has it’s excuse, with the Iranian nuclear program. It’s more about timing, rather than them being able to justify it to the international community. I think an attack on Iran would be disastrous for the middle-east, and any attack by the US would be purely at the behest of Israel.

Yip, the pretext they were looking for.

Nonsense, the US will go into Iran on it’s terms when it wants, but not at Israel’s request. The Israel lobby has some influence in the US but not nearly enough to start a war. Obama’s re-election and oil will be the determining factors as to when.

Just throwing this out there: If there is a war and it wasn’t about oil (because lets face it war is hardly an effective means of securing access to a country’s oil)…would it not be reasonable to use the “war” to totally destroy the country’s military? At least this would set the administration back by a decade or so in terms of build up of capabilities! It could have the added advantage of not hurting civilians (at least not directly)…because without the Irianian authority many of these civilians would freely participate in a democratic and prosperous nation. Iranian citizens deserve better than a paranoid, violent and illegitimate self appointed “leader” government.

Great Idea Ben!

Just look how well Iraq is after turning out.

this is a mans life we are talking about..

Well at least it now has something resembling a representative government. It still very much depends on how the next 10 years goes for Iraq but I would think it will end up better off than under a sadist power hungry lunatic like Sadam. His regime probably would have tortured and murdered as many Iraqies as died the 8 years of war over the same period.

Besides I don’t mean a full scale ground deployment and occupation like in Iraq…instead the US should learn their lessons from Iraq and Afghanistan and use a combination of small strike teams and air power (against military installations).

The US should learn their lessons and stay the hell out of Iran. The last thing we need in this recession-hit part of the world is a major disruption to the world’s energy supply. Iran’s military, while no match for the US, are no walk-over, not to mention her proxies in other countries in the region.

You make it sound way too simple and cut ‘n; dry. This could quickly lead to a full-scale regional war…. Which would effect the entire planet.

I’m afraid the Iranian people will just have to suffer on for the greater good…. Anyway, they could be slightly worse off….They could be living in Saudi Arabia

Yeah you’re right…since China and Russia would be generally opposed to military action it probably won’t happen. Although that’s the question, I don’t mean to make it sound simple, it is in fact very complex, for example: If necessary I would say that the US could get China’s unofficial approval for such a move through intricate diplomatic ties. But anyway I’m just throwing ideas around.

As for the idea that it would destabilize the region, I think it may actually have the opposite effect. It’s no secret that most of the smaller surrounding countries in the region fear a more aggressive and better armed Iran. Simply leaving Iran to build up the way they are could itself lead to an arms race because they are hated by their neighbours.

In world energy terms it wouldn’t be that disastrous either. They are not that significant that the world couldn’t absorb the shock.

I meant if the region becomes unstable, that will affect the rest of us.

True, it is a complex situation, if it wasn’t…action would have been taken already. Diplomacy is the best option here, and that means stop sanctioning Iran into a corner leaving them the only option of military retaliation. Pre-emptive military action against Iran would be the absolute worst outcome here, even more so than allowing them to acquire the bomb. At least that would trigger an uneasy peace and stability…..Previous examples being; USA-USSR, Indo-Pak and Korea. Sad, but true

I’ve read reports of the possibility of talks between the UNSC and Iran soon, and the world can only hope that something positive comes out of it

Well trust is the major issue. For example: I wouldn’t trust the Iranian govt./military with nuclear weapons capability for a second. You would effectively allow Iran to establish itself as a nuclear deterrant power in the middle east in the hope that it wouldn’t lead to either direct use against Israel or a regional arms race. I think that’s wishful thinking. I do agree that diplomacy is the right way, but in my view it needs to be directed at giving Iran a shot of reality…as in convincing them that it would do better to invest in it’s peoples welfare than in 1960s style grandiose miltary ventures.

Iran as a nuclear power does not affect me, you or anyone else in this part of the world or the US. War in the ME potentially does. While there is still no concrete evidence of an Iranian weapons programme, even if they did acquire a bomb they are not going to use it. Because sending a nuke into Israel is guaranteeing 100 fall on Iran. I don’t think that’s wishful thinking, it’s perfectly logical thinking.

Nah, this is more about the US maintaining dominance in the ME than anything else.

There’s still the issue with Israel saying it would attack Iran even without the U.S. support if Iran does not stop its enrichment process pre-emptively within months. Even though the Iran has shown ZERO interest in seeking enrichment to 95% which they currently do not even have the technology or skill to achieve.

Does anyone remember all the talks (when dialogue was actually open, but only when the US sees fit) only 2 years ago with Iran willing to consider shipping their LEU abroad to be enriched in Russia and/or France to be made into rods for their research reactor but pulled out when the US got heavy demanding essentially surrender all of their stockpile in return for fuel rods.
This is a matter of national pride and is a right of every country complying with IAEA requirements and inspections to have a save nuclear energy program. The US choose to take this path of putting unbalanced or unfair demands on a nation that is a threat to no one and has proven and stated tirelessly its intentions yet sanctions and threats of direct military attack is the way its going.

Every informed educated think and person monitoring the ME knows this yet every single news article is rehashing the same few lines that Iran is possibly after nuclear weapons when this has never been proven or even shown signs of, which if were, are still years away.

The current path can only end badly and personally hope not for the Iranian people who have been very pro-America in a very anti-American area and showed national mourning after 9/11 and helped U.S. fight the Taliban and Al’Qaeda and invested in more than 750million dollars into rebuilding Iraq also working with the US on drug trafficking and supply lines. They at no point have shown signs of aggression towards the US so its continual rhetoric of self defence is utter bullshit.
Yes, It supports Palestine’s position against Israel while not recognising Israel as a state but will honour any agreement between Israel and Palestine on peace that they manage to achieve.

Derek can you please list your sources for your claims of Iranian assistance of the US and its actionscagainst al qeeda and tge taliban…the shia militias in Iraq were supported by Iran…and the claim.for assistance with combating narcotics smuggling. As for taking them years to reach required 95% enrichment..I think.that has more ti do with the Israeli air force in 1980s and sanctions but as for Iranian announcements through FARS their equivalent of the nazi signal.and soviet pravda..i wldnt even give a grain.of salt. And your claim.that Iran would respect a peace accord with Israel..get real..they dont tecognise Israels right to exist..they arm and fund Hamas..who run Gaza with an iron fist and brook no dissent..Hamas who launch their attacks on civilian israeli targets from.civilian palestinian neighbourhoods. Trust Ahmadinijad..not likely..how will he gerrymander his nect election he has already moved to marginalise Hashemi Rafsanjani futher

Israel bombed Iraqi nuclear sites in the 80s, not Iranian

thank you Imran..im.not above accepting corrections when im proven incorrect.

http://americanforeignpolicy.org/iran-afghanistan/iran-and-afghanistan

Here is one link I found in relation to your request Colm, from the same site I posted further down.
Iran is mainly Shia and it’s the Sunni population from the north have been a problem for them with some groups I think called Jundallah, to name but one have been reported to have been financed and have weapons supplied by the US where they are carry out bombings in Shai districts.
The Sunni population suffer in lack of representation and although former presidents have sought tighter integration between them, the Ayatollahs usually oppose this leading to further tension.

Wahabi groups linked to Al-Qaeda, have even advocated the persecution of the Shia as heretics and these groups have been allegedly responsible for violent attacks and the suicide bombings at Shi’a gatherings at mosques and shrines, most notably in Iraq during the Ashura mourning ceremonies where hundreds of Shias were killed in coordinated suicide bombings and up till recently has continued with even 134 killed in 2010 in Iran.
Shia’s are only about 15-20% of the Muslim world population, with the majority of them residing in Iran, else where they are seen to be kind of polytheists giving such homage annually to the Ashura cermonies, lasting 10 days, dating back to the 7th century, and not solely worshipping Muhammad where the biggest difference between them lies.

Your comment about Rafsanjani is mute as he sealed his own faith with his centrist views and expressions. Besides Ahmadinijad has the support of the people concerning its nuclear program where Rafsanjani criticised his support for it and causing sanctions again to be imposed on the country. When he his foreign policy’s back in 95 resulted in sanctions also and his failure to see the difference between privatisation of state companies with corrupt take-overs.

“As for taking them years to reach required 95% enrichment..I think.that has more ti do with the Israeli air force in 1980s”
This makes no sense at all to me, as it was only in the last month or so Iran has been able to acquire 19.75% enrichment so yes a long way to go to 95%. Reactor technology is a quite different to the enrichment process.

No matter what the Israelis did back in the 80′s to in Iraq. Different country but same old story with Israel attacking any other M.E. country seeking nuclear technology that would diminish their nuclear weight and stature in the region.

I don’t deny for a second who Iran support but if you look who they support, Shi’ite minority’s in foreign countries. They back their own, where they are the minority in foreign countries. Your basing your opinion on one sided information, where I’m only trying to highlight the position with Shi’ite minorities deal with in predominately Sunni countries while not agreeing to the actions of these groups like Hamas and so forth.

well.said Eamon…irish left wing hypocrisy to the fore again